Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 21:36:24 05/16/04
Go up one level in this thread
On May 17, 2004 at 00:09:16, Frank E. Oldham wrote: >On May 16, 2004 at 11:28:40, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On May 16, 2004 at 10:31:10, Frank Phillips wrote: >> >>>A random selection of statistics: >>> >>>cpu=4748% 1.88M >>>cpu=4834% 1.93M >>>cpu=5094% 3.24M >>>brettermeier(C)(2466)[73] whispers: ply=12; eval=Mat08; nps=2.86M; time=18.56; >>>\ cpu=4530%; egtb=0 >>> >>>Not sure how to interpret the 50 hundred % >>> >>>Frank >> >>Me either. That would be good for a 64 CPU machine of course, max=6400% there. >>But on an 8-way box I assume something in the CPU time is wrong. In fact, I >>seem to remember that Sun did something odd. IE in normal threads the CPU time >>returned is the time per thread. But on Solaris (IIRC) CPU is the sum for all >>threads. But Crafty does the summing internally. That would make the above >>numbers make sense. Divide by 8 since the CPU time is off by a factor of 8, and >>the numbers look like 593%, 604%, 637% and so forth... > >This is true for Mac OS X also (maybe for any BSD-derived Unix ?) -- crafty >reports 396% for my dual. >Frank I'll see if I can fix it. Combining all thread times into one return value is bad, because I would like to be able to time each thread independently. I do that so that I can attribute CPU time (thread by thread) to either searching or SMP overhead. That is why you usually see my cpu% at 199 vs 200, when I can guarantee you that normally my dual xeon is only playing chess. But with solaris I can't break that out which is a pain...
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.